Packers @ Falcons 9/17/2023 Noon Start

[BrewerFan]

2 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

For context.

https://x.com/mattschneidman/status/1703528987614499138?s=20

Ok....so not Savage playing too far back.

I don't know. What should they have done? If they play Dime there and bring in another CB...not that they seem to trust Valentine at all despite all reports that he was one of the best players(not rookies or surprise players, just best) of camp.

And if they are playing with 6 DBs, 2 DL, 2OLB, 1MLB, they probably just hand it to Robinson anyway.

 

Everyone knows I hate Barry as a DC, I want him fired, but I think the defense is getting too much heat here. They're a matchup nightmare and you could have beaten them by...scoring in the 4th Quarter and not trying to milk a 12 point lead.

 

[BrewerFan]

4 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Yucky, Packers lost a lot of games like this Rodgers's first year. 

I think we lost 6 games in which we led in the 4th quarter and 2 games we were tied in the 4th quarter Rodgers 1st year as a starter.

That team reminds me of this one sooo much. I think ATL will prove to be one of the best rushing teams in the NFL this year, but if you put together one drive, if Love makes one or two throws(or is given a couple more opportunities on 1st/2nd down to make another throw or two) this game is the Packers and we don't even get into the Falcons wearing the Packers down.

I'm still really excited about this team, but I want to see more put on Love's shoulders. I want to see more than a competent game manager who doesn't turn the ball over and has pretty stats. I wanna see LaFleur keeping his foot on the gas when it's a 2 score game. 

Not sure that happens in Week 1 without the Walker Pick6. Also not sure if that's fair to ask of Love without Jones, Watson and Jenkins, but until we see that we still don't really KNOW what Love's really capable of.

[Fear The Chorizo]

It's not even what happened in the 4th quarter with the defense getting rolled and the offense not being able to make a play or two when they needed it most - If Jaire picks off a gimme INT in the 1st half it'd be a coin flip if he'd make 1 guy miss and score or set the offense up in instant FG range, and the same could be said of the dropped INT early in the 2nd half by Quay.  Add those missed opportunities to make plays handed to them to the botched FG attempt on their 1st drive due to a false start and delay of game (at the time I was more P-Oed at the special teams unit for taking 40 minutes to get set up instead of 40 seconds, but it is on MLF to not just take that penalty and burn a timeout, too), we're talking about being up more than 2 TDs headed into the 4th quarter and the sustained running game the Falcons were able to get going in the 2nd half probably never even starts. 

It's just a game full of missed opportunities, and they let a team who does one thing really well offensively get into a good rhythm with it, and couldn't come up with a big drive when they needed it in the 4th quarter.  This should be a 2-0 squad and it stinks they're not due to largely self-inflicted mistakes.

[adambr2]

29 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

It's not even what happened in the 4th quarter with the defense getting rolled and the offense not being able to make a play or two when they needed it most - If Jaire picks off a gimme INT in the 1st half it'd be a coin flip if he'd make 1 guy miss and score or set the offense up in instant FG range, and the same could be said of the dropped INT early in the 2nd half by Quay.  Add those missed opportunities to make plays handed to them to the botched FG attempt on their 1st drive due to a false start and delay of game (at the time I was more P-Oed at the special teams unit for taking 40 minutes to get set up instead of 40 seconds, but it is on MLF to not just take that penalty and burn a timeout, too), we're talking about being up more than 2 TDs headed into the 4th quarter and the sustained running game the Falcons were able to get going in the 2nd half probably never even starts. 

It's just a game full of missed opportunities, and they let a team who does one thing really well offensively get into a good rhythm with it, and couldn't come up with a big drive when they needed it in the 4th quarter.  This should be a 2-0 squad and it stinks they're not due to largely self-inflicted mistakes.

 I'm sure that the Falcons feel that way too. Hollins feels he should have kept his heels in, they all feel like they should have been able to convert 1st and goal from the 1. Koo feels like he should have made the XP. 

Green Bay had about exactly half the total yards of Atlanta today. They were gashed the entire game on the ground and for the most part, outplayed. It's hard to make the case that they "should" have won. They played plenty poorly enough to lose. It just mostly happened in the 4th. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I expect to see a lot of losses like this one. There is just a lot of youth across the board.

I think at a bare minimum we have seen that Love is good. He doesn't suck. Hard to tell just how good yet, I would like to see him with Watson. 

And AJ Dillon will be elsewhere, possibly out of football next year. 

[BrewerFan]

23 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

It's not even what happened in the 4th quarter with the defense getting rolled and the offense not being able to make a play or two when they needed it most - If Jaire picks off a gimme INT in the 1st half it'd be a coin flip if he'd make 1 guy miss and score or set the offense up in instant FG range, and the same could be said of the dropped INT early in the 2nd half by Quay.  Add those missed opportunities to make plays handed to them to the botched FG attempt on their 1st drive due to a false start and delay of game (at the time I was more P-Oed at the special teams unit for taking 40 minutes to get set up instead of 40 seconds, but it is on MLF to not just take that penalty and burn a timeout, too), we're talking about being up more than 2 TDs headed into the 4th quarter and the sustained running game the Falcons were able to get going in the 2nd half probably never even starts. 

It's just a game full of missed opportunities, and they let a team who does one thing really well offensively get into a good rhythm with it, and couldn't come up with a big drive when they needed it in the 4th quarter.  This should be a 2-0 squad and it stinks they're not due to largely self-inflicted mistakes.

Yup. I think this is pretty much as accurate of a description as you can give. Just ONE play in any facet of the game and it's a W, especially one earlier that forces them to go to their passing game.

Atlanta has Ridder at QB. They have great weapons, but they're one dimensional. You have a chance to force them to play to their weakness, but left them enough room to be able to stick to their strengths.

BTW, easy to see how that Roschon Johnson went under the radar last year when he was playing in the same offense as Bijan. My god that dude is electric. 

 

I think it was old snapper that said this was similar to Rodgers 1st year as a starter(6 games lost with a 4Q lead, 2 when tied in the 4th). I guess it's just part of growing, but it doesn't make it any less annoying.

[BrewerFan]

3 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I expect to see a lot of losses like this one. There is just a lot of youth across the board.

I think at a bare minimum we have seen that Love is good. He doesn't suck. Hard to tell just how good yet, I would like to see him with Watson. 

And AJ Dillon will be elsewhere, possibly out of football next year. 

As maybe Dillon's biggest critic, I thought he played well. I ALSO thought that Kenny Clark had a really nice game.

I don't agree(at all) that the Packers were outplayed all game. Yardage totals don't mean much to me. 

But, again, you nailed it when you compared this to Rodgers 1st year as a starter. 8 games they were tied(2) or leading(6) in the 4Q.

And I still feel like they're holding Love back. I want to see some more plays off script, and eventually connecting on big plays. But so far, Love has looked like a competent QB, but for those of us who've watched him closely, he's also been one who's been very....protected. And that's fine, but we're going to find out exactly how good he is in some of the games vs better defenses. 

[adambr2]

6 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

 

I don't agree(at all) that the Packers were outplayed all game. Yardage totals don't mean much to me. 

The Falcons left a lot of points on the board. A lot. Yardage totals may not mean much to you, but I bet you can't find many games where a team is outgained by 200+ yards and wins.

As a whole, the team with the yardage advantage wins a game in the NFL over 65% of the time.

[BrewerFan]

3 hours ago, adambr2 said:

The Falcons left a lot of points on the board. A lot. Yardage totals may not mean much to you, but I bet you can't find many games where a team is outgained by 200+ yards and wins.

As a whole, the team with the yardage advantage wins a game in the NFL over 65% of the time.

And 70% of the time the team that wins the turnover battle wins the team. So what?
Pretty sure the Vikings out-gained the Packers by quite a bit last year when we were up 40-3 on them before winning 40-17.
We had 18 more yards against the Bears last week in a game that was 38-14.

What's more...I don't really care. This is a Packers board and we're talking about how the Packers played.

We got worn down and played conservatively. One score or series in the 4th quarter and the Falcons have to abandon the run game. That pick 6 right in Jaire's lap, the very same ball that Quay took to the house last week, the ball that hit Douglas in his hands.

Yeah, I think we were the better team, we took our foot off the gas in the 4th quarter and the Falcons completed their comeback. I think @Fear The Chorizowas right. There were half a dozen plays where if we just make the play, we win. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

7 hours ago, adambr2 said:

 I'm sure that the Falcons feel that way too. Hollins feels he should have kept his heels in, they all feel like they should have been able to convert 1st and goal from the 1. Koo feels like he should have made the XP. 

Green Bay had about exactly half the total yards of Atlanta today. They were gashed the entire game on the ground and for the most part, outplayed. It's hard to make the case that they "should" have won. They played plenty poorly enough to lose. It just mostly happened in the 4th. 

GB also had close too 100 yards of offense due to PI penalties that don't show up on the stat sheet, so the offensive yardage output isnt nearly as bad as the numbers actually look ...that being said, running only 44ish offensive plays isn't good enough for them as an offense, and that did wear down a defense on top of the fact they once again struggled to stop the run.  The offense got away from a really good midgame rhythm, and couldn't find a drive the team really needed late third/early 4th quarter.  With all that they still had a shot to drive down to kick a fg at the end to win it and couldn't get it done.

I'd argue the plays the Packers didn't make were much more impactful to the outcome and overall flow of the game than a guy not getting two feet in bounds on a catch and the team having to settle for 3 instead of 6 on a drive.  

[adambr2]

The "if we just made this play, this play or this play, it changes everything" argument could be made in almost any game. Yeah, Ridder made some mistakes that we didn't take advantage of. Love also threw one in the 4th on 3rd down that could have been a pick 6. 

The penalty yardage on the long PIs skewing the yardage totals is a fair point. I just think when you allow 450 yards and are, as our own HC put it, "gashed consistently" on the ground all day, you don't have a very good case for saying you played well enough to win. We lost, and there's plenty that went into that. Both sides caught some breaks at times, as NFL games go. 

Do I think we can beat Atlanta? Sure, being at full strength would help, but we have to do much better stopping the run. 

[homer]

I think it's different when the "if" plays are self inflicted goofs. The field goal that turned into a punt because they got a delay of game penalty and Love not knowing the snap count on the sneak are examples. 

[adambr2]

8 minutes ago, homer said:

I think it's different when the "if" plays are self inflicted goofs. The field goal that turned into a punt because they got a delay of game penalty and Love not knowing the snap count on the sneak are examples. 

I still don't understand why you don't still just try the FG. 56 is obviously not a chip shot, but it's not out of any kicker's range in this day and age. Is MLF afraid to challenge rookies? It's within his range and it's in a dome. Just send him out there and try it. Unless you think he's going to miss 56 short (he's not), makes no sense why those 5 yards are a deal breaker. 

I hate the age old practice of punting in fringe FG range and likely ending up with a touchback and netting only 20-25 yards of field position in exchange for giving up a scoring opportunity. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

3 hours ago, adambr2 said:

The "if we just made this play, this play or this play, it changes everything" argument could be made in almost any game. Yeah, Ridder made some mistakes that we didn't take advantage of. Love also threw one in the 4th on 3rd down that could have been a pick 6. 

The penalty yardage on the long PIs skewing the yardage totals is a fair point. I just think when you allow 450 yards and are, as our own HC put it, "gashed consistently" on the ground all day, you don't have a very good case for saying you played well enough to win. We lost, and there's plenty that went into that. Both sides caught some breaks at times, as NFL games go. 

Do I think we can beat Atlanta? Sure, being at full strength would help, but we have to do much better stopping the run. 

In general I mostly agree with all of this - there's a reason why blowout games are few and far between in the NFL...specific to yesterday's game, I just think the Packers had enough of those gift-wrapped opportunities to dramatically impact both score and game flow early on they blew, and as is typical those miscues wind up biting them in the W-L column at the end of a road game they were in firm control of for 3 quarters.

Does the defense appear to suck against the run once again?  Yes - but ATL is one of a handful of teams that are built to focus on running the football, so they're going to gouge a bunch of defenses this year in that department when their opponents fail to make plays to force them to ditch the running game.  Catching those two easy INTs dramatically changes the flow of the game and probably gets the score to a point where the Falcons just don't go on a running play binge midway through the 3rd quarter when they were down 12.  

Offensively, even with the two scoring drives to open up the 3rd quarter the Packers didn't maintain possession long at all - their TD drives were 4 and 2 minute variety, followed by 2 straight 3 and outs when they needed a drive and then that last possession that also went nowhere.  

[adambr2]

9 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

In general I mostly agree with all of this - there's a reason why blowout games are few and far between in the NFL...specific to yesterday's game, I just think the Packers had enough of those gift-wrapped opportunities to dramatically impact both score and game flow early on they blew, and as is typical those miscues wind up biting them in the W-L column at the end of a road game they were in firm control of for 3 quarters.

Does the defense appear to suck against the run once again?  Yes - but ATL is one of a handful of teams that are built to focus on running the football, so they're going to gouge a bunch of defenses this year in that department when their opponents fail to make plays to force them to ditch the running game.  Catching those two easy INTs dramatically changes the flow of the game and probably gets the score to a point where the Falcons just don't go on a running play binge midway through the 3rd quarter when they were down 12.  

Offensively, even with the two scoring drives to open up the 3rd quarter the Packers didn't maintain possession long at all - their TD drives were 4 and 2 minute variety, followed by 2 straight 3 and outs when they needed a drive and then that last possession that also went nowhere.  

Bijan is definitely going to be really special and give a lot of teams headaches. Allgier looks like just a guy. Our defensive strengths are definitely not a great matchup on our side for what they do well. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

Just now, adambr2 said:

Bijan is definitely going to be really special and give a lot of teams headaches. Allgier looks like just a guy. Our defensive strengths are definitely not a great matchup on our side for what they do well. 

There's a reason why he was considered the best player in this year's draft (and why if he fell even a little bit I was fully on board GB using the draft capital they had to move up a little to get him), regardless of position.  He just gets to holes instantly and has the vision/burst to make the 1st guy miss even in the hole - barring injury I think he'll be considered the best back in the league by this time next year.

[adambr2]

19 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

There's a reason why he was considered the best player in this year's draft (and why if he fell even a little bit I was fully on board GB using the draft capital they had to move up a little to get him), regardless of position.  He just gets to holes instantly and has the vision/burst to make the 1st guy miss even in the hole - barring injury I think he'll be considered the best back in the league by this time next year.

I agree. I started the whole draft thread back in the spring about how we should take him at #15 if there and was mostly dismissed and told we should never take an RB that early. Of course, he never would have made it there anyway. 

[CheezWizHed]

My thoughts on the game:

Love: Still learning and growing. Better completion %, but still started slow (and ended slow this time).  He certainly didn't look as comfortable today.  I guess Rodgers never owned the Falcons, so Love is going to have to learn that one himself.

Dillon: Looked a bit like the older Dillon in making a few cuts this time... But then just couldn't keep his feet to save his life.  Fights hard if you hit him high... feathers take him down if hit low. 

LT: The Nijman/Walker rotation was odd. I guess it mostly worked and it explains the depth chart... Overall they looked OK out there. 

Newman: How has this guy not learned to stay in his gap???  Same problem he had as a rookie (over and over and over).  As soon as he has no one to block, he turns his head and combo blocks with the T next to him.  But he leaves a gap a MACK truck could drive through and a stunt or delayed pass rush goes right through it for the sack.  Often, the combo block doesn't always help either... sometimes knocking the tackle off-balanced (or the rusher outside so the tackle is now out of position).  Stay in your lane dude. Or at least keep your head so you can watch if anyone is coming into your gap. 

Myers & Love false start.  I'm guessing this was a Myer's miss?  "Wait, Rodgers never did this..."

DL: Overall, they looked good.  Clark had a really nice day; especially early.  Run tackling was rough (everywhere).  The only knock I saw on the DL for run stop was that it seemed one person would penetrate upfield and leave a gap behind that that RB would utilize.  Not always the same person either. 

ILB: Really big gap between Walker and Campbell.  Seemed like they constantly were running at Campbell and he couldn't disengage from blocking.  I know the performance he had a couple years ago was probably over his head, but really big drop off now. Walker conversely looked really good. 

Safety: Nice to Savage playing well this year.

CB: Jaire didn't have the best of days.  Too short, bad hands, or just a touch behind most of the day.  Not horrible, but now all-pro either. 

Carlson was beautiful again... maybe he is only inaccurate in practice? 

Whelen had some wonderful punts.  Really great leg and hangtime.  But his best play was easily missed.  Orzech had a horrible snap that almost was behind Whelen.  He was able to grab it and put it down without so much as a hitch from Carlson. I guess we know more about his work as a holder!

[HarryDoyle]

8 hours ago, adambr2 said:

I still don't understand why you don't still just try the FG. 56 is obviously not a chip shot, but it's not out of any kicker's range in this day and age. Is MLF afraid to challenge rookies? It's within his range and it's in a dome. Just send him out there and try it. Unless you think he's going to miss 56 short (he's not), makes no sense why those 5 yards are a deal breaker. 

I hate the age old practice of punting in fringe FG range and likely ending up with a touchback and netting only 20-25 yards of field position in exchange for giving up a scoring opportunity. 

Here's an explanation, and a dumb one at that.

 

[BrewerFan]

10 hours ago, adambr2 said:

The "if we just made this play, this play or this play, it changes everything" argument could be made in almost any game. Yeah, Ridder made some mistakes that we didn't take advantage of. Love also threw one in the 4th on 3rd down that could have been a pick 6. 

The penalty yardage on the long PIs skewing the yardage totals is a fair point. I just think when you allow 450 yards and are, as our own HC put it, "gashed consistently" on the ground all day, you don't have a very good case for saying you played well enough to win. We lost, and there's plenty that went into that. Both sides caught some breaks at times, as NFL games go. 

Do I think we can beat Atlanta? Sure, being at full strength would help, but we have to do much better stopping the run. 

Yeah...so what though? It's kinda like we're Wisconsin fans and talking about it from the Packers perspective. I'm not a Falcons fan wondering how the Falcons could get better. I'm a Packers fan who wants to break down how the Packers played, not every other team in the league.

 

And sure a LARGE part of the self inflicted wounds were the constantly short possessions in the 2nd half and specifically the 4th quarter that led to the defense getting "gashed." Do we do this with any other sport? If the Brewers come up with the bases loaded and no outs and we have 3 terrible at bats, do we "both sides," that and say," well, remember, the Cubs had a bad at bat in the 1st and then in the 3rd...

[adambr2]

4 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

Yeah...so what though? It's kinda like we're Wisconsin fans and talking about it from the Packers perspective. I'm not a Falcons fan wondering how the Falcons could get better. I'm a Packers fan who wants to break down how the Packers played, not every other team in the league.

 

And sure a LARGE part of the self inflicted wounds were the constantly short possessions in the 2nd half and specifically the 4th quarter that led to the defense getting "gashed." Do we do this with any other sport? If the Brewers come up with the bases loaded and no outs and we have 3 terrible at bats, do we "both sides," that and say," well, remember, the Cubs had a bad at bat in the 1st and then in the 3rd...

It's not about being a fan of any particular team? I'm just trying to look at it from an impartial viewpoint and concede that in a lot of ways we weren't really the better team yesterday, we just can be but have work to do to get there. 

And the Falcons were at nearly 6 YPC coming into the 4th quarter. If it was just a 4th quarter problem where we clearly just got worn down, it would be less of a red flag but we were getting gashed long before it was 24-12. Which has been a longstanding problem with the rush D.

[BrewerFan]

5 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

My thoughts on the game:

Love: Still learning and growing. Better completion %, but still started slow (and ended slow this time).  He certainly didn't look as comfortable today.  I guess Rodgers never owned the Falcons, so Love is going to have to learn that one himself.

Dillon: Looked a bit like the older Dillon in making a few cuts this time... But then just couldn't keep his feet to save his life.  Fights hard if you hit him high... feathers take him down if hit low. 

LT: The Nijman/Walker rotation was odd. I guess it mostly worked and it explains the depth chart... Overall they looked OK out there. 

Newman: How has this guy not learned to stay in his gap???  Same problem he had as a rookie (over and over and over).  As soon as he has no one to block, he turns his head and combo blocks with the T next to him.  But he leaves a gap a MACK truck could drive through and a stunt or delayed pass rush goes right through it for the sack.  Often, the combo block doesn't always help either... sometimes knocking the tackle off-balanced (or the rusher outside so the tackle is now out of position).  Stay in your lane dude. Or at least keep your head so you can watch if anyone is coming into your gap. 

Myers & Love false start.  I'm guessing this was a Myer's miss?  "Wait, Rodgers never did this..."

DL: Overall, they looked good.  Clark had a really nice day; especially early.  Run tackling was rough (everywhere).  The only knock I saw on the DL for run stop was that it seemed one person would penetrate upfield and leave a gap behind that that RB would utilize.  Not always the same person either. 

ILB: Really big gap between Walker and Campbell.  Seemed like they constantly were running at Campbell and he couldn't disengage from blocking.  I know the performance he had a couple years ago was probably over his head, but really big drop off now. Walker conversely looked really good. 

Safety: Nice to Savage playing well this year.

CB: Jaire didn't have the best of days.  Too short, bad hands, or just a touch behind most of the day.  Not horrible, but now all-pro either. 

Carlson was beautiful again... maybe he is only inaccurate in practice? 

Whelen had some wonderful punts.  Really great leg and hangtime.  But his best play was easily missed.  Orzech had a horrible snap that almost was behind Whelen.  He was able to grab it and put it down without so much as a hitch from Carlson. I guess we know more about his work as a holder!

 

Dillon definitely ran better. Ran harder. A couple times where he actually could have bounced it outside and he didn't, but given how often he's tried when the hole was there, I'll take that. He was physical.

I agree with not banging on the DL for getting gashed. They played well enough most of the game, just wore down because the offense couldn't hold up. 

Campbell is good at diagnosing, but the gap between he and Quay is now enormous. I think most of that is Quay just getting better, but some of it is certainly Campbell not playing as well.

 

Love has really been protected schematically and by the OL. Even with the Walker/Nijman rotation(Which I also don't get, Walker appears to be the better OT at this point) he had time to throw.

Maybe with Jenkins, Bakh, Jones and Watson out, you're limited in the playcalling?

And the only nit picking I'd do with Whelen is he's not good at dropping the ball inside the 10-15, but he's also a rookie. Savage looked really good. Along with Jaire and Quay, he had a ball he could have picked. Had two hands on it, but he looks like a different man. 

 

Zach Tom is also proving he's an elite OT and probably the future at LT(which means RT should be a priority in the draft, but that's for another day). 

[CheezWizHed]

16 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Campbell is good at diagnosing, but the gap between he and Quay is now enormous. I think most of that is Quay just getting better, but some of it is certainly Campbell not playing as well.

Quay is playing like Campbell was a couple years ago - knifing in and making plays.  Always around the ball and often making the tackles.  Campbell is playing like Quay did early last year - getting stuck on blocks and washed out of plays.  

I know C had some injury issues early last year, but I've not heard anything about it this year.  Perhaps they swapped roles in the defense since Q is the play caller now, but I wouldn't think that would have anything to do with C getting stuck on blocks constantly. 

[BrewerFan]

3 hours ago, adambr2 said:

It's not about being a fan of any particular team? I'm just trying to look at it from an impartial viewpoint and concede that in a lot of ways we weren't really the better team yesterday, we just can be but have work to do to get there. 

And the Falcons were at nearly 6 YPC coming into the 4th quarter. If it was just a 4th quarter problem where we clearly just got worn down, it would be less of a red flag but we were getting gashed long before it was 24-12. Which has been a longstanding problem with the rush D.

No, we really weren't. 

Of the final 40 plays, the Falcons ran 30 of them, the Packers ran 10...and that includes the 4 in the final 57 seconds.

It was so clear the defense got worn down in the 4th quarter. The Packers were coming up with stops when they needed them, the offense became overly conservative,  had possession for I think ~3 minutes the 4th quarter and the end of the 3rd. So 6 plays and more like 2:30 until they got the ball back.  

 

I'm not putting this loss on the defense facing that rushing attack, I'm putting it on the offense. They had the Falcons on the rope and they stopped swinging. I DON'T think this was the same old defense, I think this was growing pains with Love and...then just the absence of the left side of their OL, Jones. But they've got a 1000 yard back, a running QB and the 6th overall pick in the draft and one of the top RB prospects in years PLUS one of the elite run blocking OLs. 

And they were still managing to get off the field(save for the 3 4th down plays) until the offense just couldn't get a single 1st down.

The Falcons made some nice play calls as well. That naked boot by Ridder...great play. That play was going absolutely nowhere if he gives the ball up on that outsize zone, but on 4th down, the naked boot led to a score.

 

There is a FUNDAMENTAL difference between how this team played, even yesterday and how this team has played in the past, giving up 200 yards before contact or just allowing the OL to re-set the LOS. The worst players on the field on the team defense were probably Nixon, Campbell and probably Ford. But Quay played great, Clark better, Wyatt, Slaton, Savage again.

But again, if you're getting regular snaps from Hollins, Brooks, Wooden and Enagbare(and that was one personnel grouping on a 3rd down play)...that's a problem. Hollins is your 6th best Edge.

I said before the game, they should activate Ford for this game...but they didn't. An I don't know if that changes much, but there's ZERO doubt Clark, Slaton and Wyatt wore down...maybe a couple 1st downs could have prevented that.

 

And I don't know if the first sentence was a question, but how is it not about being a fan of a team? Do you follow the Falcons all year? Anyway...you can both sides this all you want. I'm gonna look at it from the Packers vantage point.

[adambr2]

2 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

No, we really weren't. 

Of the final 40 plays, the Falcons ran 30 of them, the Packers ran 10...and that includes the 4 in the final 57 seconds.

It was so clear the defense got worn down in the 4th quarter. The Packers were coming up with stops when they needed them, the offense became overly conservative,  had possession for I think ~3 minutes the 4th quarter and the end of the 3rd. So 6 plays and more like 2:30 until they got the ball back.  

 

I'm not putting this loss on the defense facing that rushing attack, I'm putting it on the offense. They had the Falcons on the rope and they stopped swinging. I DON'T think this was the same old defense, I think this was growing pains with Love and...then just the absence of the left side of their OL, Jones. But they've got a 1000 yard back, a running QB and the 6th overall pick in the draft and one of the top RB prospects in years PLUS one of the elite run blocking OLs. 

And they were still managing to get off the field(save for the 3 4th down plays) until the offense just couldn't get a single 1st down.

The Falcons made some nice play calls as well. That naked boot by Ridder...great play. That play was going absolutely nowhere if he gives the ball up on that outsize zone, but on 4th down, the naked boot led to a score.

 

There is a FUNDAMENTAL difference between how this team played, even yesterday and how this team has played in the past, giving up 200 yards before contact or just allowing the OL to re-set the LOS. The worst players on the field on the team defense were probably Nixon, Campbell and probably Ford. But Quay played great, Clark better, Wyatt, Slaton, Savage again.

But again, if you're getting regular snaps from Hollins, Brooks, Wooden and Enagbare(and that was one personnel grouping on a 3rd down play)...that's a problem. Hollins is your 6th best Edge.

I said before the game, they should activate Ford for this game...but they didn't. An I don't know if that changes much, but there's ZERO doubt Clark, Slaton and Wyatt wore down...maybe a couple 1st downs could have prevented that.

 

And I don't know if the first sentence was a question, but how is it not about being a fan of a team? Do you follow the Falcons all year? Anyway...you can both sides this all you want. I'm gonna look at it from the Packers vantage point.

How can you say we weren't gashed before the 4th quarter? Our own HC said it...Bijan was 14 for 108 going into the 4th quarter...almost 8 YPC!

I'm not even disagreeing with you on some of the other stuff, I'm not excusing our offense or the way they shut down in the 4th quarter, I'm not necessarily disagreeing that fatigue was an issue in Q4, I'm just befuddled that you can say that we weren't getting gashed well before the 4th quarter when I've presented complete statistical evidence to the contrary. It's not like there was one big run that Bijan sprung for 90 yards that skewed the stats, it was huge chunk plays, 8, 9 yards, frequently throughout Q1 to Q3.

And that last paragraph was really unnecessary and condescending IMO; I should be free to point out my concerns with our rush defense and debate their performance with you without sarcastic and passive aggressive questions about which team I cheer for, and I'm not going to respond to that paragraph beyond that.